Does DeSci need MeMe coins? Does MeMe coins need DeSci? Can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi?
During this period of time, I lurked in the unconscious abyss of on-chain PVP and observed for a long time the interpretation and development of DeSci narrative in the phenomenal world:
From the http://Pump.fun imitation plate Pump Science launching the longevity drug $RIF $URO meme coin for on-chain PK, to @0xAA_Science igniting the Scihub-related memecoin attention war, to the OG DeSci projects such as Bio Protocol, Vita DAO, and ResearchHub, and finally today when the market thought that the DeSci narrative would become a thing of the past, Andrew Kang made a loud call and invented a narrative: 2024 DeSci = 2019 DeFi.
Fantastic new narratives such as "open source scientific papers" and "reshaping the scientific research paradigm" have made some people in the scientific research and crypto circles visibly excited. For those of us who have been immersed in left-wing ideology for many years without knowing it, the MeMe coin with positive externalities is full of justice.
But the question is, does MeMe coin really need to have positive externalities like DeSci? I agree more with the views of Toly and Crypto Weituo. MeMe coin does not need positive externalities. Its primary function is the cyber lottery of the 2020s, which sells extreme volatility to young people who dream of getting rich overnight. Young P players born in the Z era have an opportunity to participate in wealth distribution.
Giving a ticket a high value and meaning is what China Sports Lottery and Welfare Lottery do. Doing so will eventually attract many ignorant people to pay IQ tax, making the director (dealer)'s pockets fatter, but there is no real positive externality.
But another fact is that meme coin trading is a typical attention tokenization market, and therefore obeys the laws of communication. A good narrative (whether it is a positive externality narrative or cult culture) is a good social media meme virus. From this perspective, DeSci is not bad, and it is a kind of honor market collusion.
So, does DeSci need meme coins? To be more precise, does DeSci need the get-rich-quick effect and market attention brought by meme coins? The answer is yes.
As an unpopular track, although it has the endorsement and investment from institutions such as Coinbase, Binance, Pfizer, as well as Brain Armstrong, CZ, and Vitalik, the DeSci project has always been regarded by the market as a social currency for bigwigs (for the need to show off), and is not favored and allocated by mainstream market funds (does anyone still remember the ReFi narrative that Celo created in the last cycle?).
Finally, can DeSci really become a disruptive innovation like DeFi? There is a little hope. Here I would like to quote Popper's philosophy of science. Science is not only about truth, but also about power. It is also a kind of religious power of the scientific community, which attaches great importance to Taoism and academic tradition.
Whether it is scientific research DAO, Pump Science, or the pirate-style attack mentioned in Toly's tweet, they are all trying to challenge and innovate the existing power structure of the scientific community through new organizational methods, new fundraising and donation paradigms, and new ways of collaboration.
Although it is just a spark, it can give people warmth and hope on a cold winter night.
But to be honest, DeSci does not have the same high financial attributes as DeFi. It lacks the two powerful tools of composability (Lego stacking) and circular leverage. It is difficult for DeSci to create new assets of 100 billion yuan out of thin air like DeFi did in the past.
The end.
